This film is the director's first feature. Homosexuality has always existed of course in all societies, Japan not being an exception, but I have read that this was one of the first films to deal with it in a matter of fact way. Granted a main protagonist who is in college but works as a rent boy every night is not you typical coming of age gay story. Nor does Hashiguchi beat about the bush. The very first scene sees the boy Tatsuro in a hotel room with middle-aged trick. Not does the boy act contrite or feel ashamed. As he says in the film when asked, the work does not disgust him. The actor who plays him- Yoshihiko Hakamada- is tall, with a aloof, steely demeanour. As the interviews make clear, he was cast after a lengthy audition, and many had commented then that both him, and the director Hashiguchi (then a very youthful 31) looked like brothers. He is superb. The film also details his relationship with a female classmate and a younger hustler to whom he unwittingly becomes a protector. (Masashi Endo who plays the latter looks like a non-professional actor, and his scenes are a bit awkward). Although Hashiguchi has dealt with homosexuality as central themes in later films, the subject matter is not so upfront and explicit as here. (HUSH his breakout film, has only one brief cuddle between the gay couple in the entire film). I guess as the mainstream beckons and the budgets get bigger, your films have to appeal to a wider audience to make some return.. Hashiguchi to his credit has found a middle way in later films without being a wash out (think of the misfires and Hollywood projects of Gus Van Sant as compared to the poetry of his first film Mala Noche for an example). However on the DVD I have (released by Water Bearer films) there is an interview with Hashiguchi who in fact says that on it's release the film (English translation- SLIGHT FEVER IN A 20-YR. OLD) did pretty well in revenues in Japan, especially among the younger audiences.

The word "Slight" in the title fits. Thin acting, an equally thin plot line, and a string of vacuously elongated scenes make up this film, which demonstrates what happens when a director in-over-his-head meets a half-finished script and no-experience talents."Fever" -- which is supposed to suggest "hot", not "tepid" -- wants to be a morality play about two young hustlers. Tatsaru is a college student working as a male prostitute. Shin works in the same establishment, a bar whose clients choose from a stable of boys.Aimed at a teen audience, apparently one motive of this movie is to distinguish for the audience the difference between sex for money and love. The film vaguely manages to approximate this, its only clear, idea ... then gives us two or three empty minutes to contemplate it.Both of the boys are sought after by girls their own age. The father of one girl is a client of Tatsaru in mid-film. When Tatsaru later goes to her parents' home for dinner, there is nothing but the embarrassed "tension" between the two men to keep us interested ... for at *least ten minutes.Another of the film's apparent motives: to establish that gay men are lonely, and that love between two men is hopeless. This sentiment -- uncontradicted by any of what passes for action in the film -- is spelled out verbatim by an drunken adult client toward the film's end in another of the stretched-beyond belief scenes. Many art films stretch action to good effect, but this film is just filling time.I hated "Twist" when I saw it, but it was at least competent as a film. "Sudden Fever" can't begin to aspire to that level.

OK. Will someone who's seen this before explain this to me? I saw this movie twice. I would say the same things that have already been said here. It's a wonderful movie about these two boys, and their female friends, and the boy "falling in love" with the other boy... blah, blah. But I DON'T GET IT.SPOILER******** Why did Shin burn Tatsuro's picture after Tatsuro kissed him and tried to have sex with him? Was Shin somehow falling "out" of love because Tatsuro was "just in it for sex, fun, and money"? Was Shin mad about that? Was Shin's feeling just a sexual attraction and not "love" as his girl best friend said it is? What was the ending all about? Seriously! Did both characters realize that they're NOT gay and they're only hustling for the money? Or have they realized that they ARE gay and are in love with each other? I DO NOT GET THE ENDING! HELP ME OUT HERE PLEASE!!! This movie is SO FULL OF TENSION. It got me shouting HUUUUUUH? all the while. I was wanting more and more of Shin/Tatsuro's sexual tension!!! Their chemistry is freakishly depressing and HOT at the same time!! The end was such a "HUH?" to me that I seriously need a part 2 to make me understand how Tatsuro and Shin really feel for each other! :( PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND THIS MOVIE. I absolutely loved it but I REALLY need more Shin/Tatsuro "looovin'." :D

I saw this movie in DVD release that came out 10 years after its initial theatrical release, so there is a lot of making-of stuff on the DVD that reveals some surprising things about the movie, e.g. almost all the actors were first-timers; it was a huge box office hit in Japan; the director put down his own work as substandard (much too hard on himself, in my opinion).The story itself turns and twists on the fact that characters who seem strong--Tatsuro and Yoriko--are actually weaker than their younger friends--Shin-chan and Asami-- who turn out to be strongest when they are the most vulnerable. The name of the escort service the boys work for is Pinocchio, a sort of puppet palace/donkey island where it takes something special to become a real, live boy. Overcoming self deception is the biggest hurdle. I suppose it is meant to be Tatsuro's movie, but Shin-chan stole it from him, not with any sort of mugging, but largely because of the charm of the character. All of the performances were pitch perfect.I didn't come away feeling quite as gloomy as our other commentator did, maybe because I recognize low-key Japanese upbeat-ness when I see it. I was charmed by all four of these kids, but definitely not in a manipulated Hollywood sort of way. They all seemed like the kids I teach: very real, very embattled, and very resilient.I have a quibble with the subtitles. They were mostly pretty good, but since it's an older movie, we're stuck with them... no way of turning them off. However, there was an occasional omission of some dialog from the translation that I could see no reason for, and--if left in--would have actually enhanced the understanding. I think perhaps this was critical in the last scene, and could be the thing that led the other commentator to find it depressing, because he didn't catch this one little bit of dialog--when Tatsuro tells Shin-chan how much he actually got for posing and Shin-chan's response to it--that was actually quite sardonically funny.